Diego Costa

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

I treat them as the best readily available source of information on fees, which is what they are. If you've got access to copies of confidential contracts and legal documents, I'd be happy to revise the figures.

[Barrington Womble]

I treat them as the best readily available source of information on fees' date=' which is what they are. If you've got access to copies of confidential contracts and legal documents, I'd be happy to revise the figures.[/quote']

 

The echo is complete nonsense. When I mentioned how we'd cut the wage bill a week or so ago and you said you didn't believe the £25m saving that has been rumoured - well that tumour was started by the times and tony barratt who have far more credibility than the echo. Yet you dismissed it because that suited your agenda and you're treating a shit sheet like the echo as some type of bible, it's just really funny. You're like these fools who support arsenal and think they're serious about buying players and do all they can to compete for the league despite all evidence to the contrary that the club just play to the galleries by feeding links to pro-arsenal journo's.

 

Personally I think the newspapers are full of shit no matter what the banner is on the front page, but then I am not using them as my point of reference. When asked why I think FSG have no sporting ambition, I can point to last summer, that's all the evidence anybody needed when they decided to shaft a junior manager who needed all the help he could get. That's fact, so much fact they were forced to apologise. But you go ahead and keep believing the echo, which has had no credible links to the club since rick parry cut them off.

[TheHowieLama]

Good point on the newspaper stuff.

 

On the ambition comment, funny, they did the exact same thing - wage bill slashed, dumping all established players and bringing in young farm hands, bringing in a 2nd year coach - with the Red Sox.

[dickie mint]

Good point on the newspaper stuff.

 

On the ambition comment, funny, they did the exact same thing - wage bill slashed, dumping all established players and bringing in young farm hands, bringing in a 2nd year coach - with the Red Sox.

 

 

 

Elton John's had loads of number one songs but he never won the league with Watford.

[TheHowieLama]

That is true.

[Barrington Womble]

Good point on the newspaper stuff.

 

On the ambition comment' date=' funny, they did the exact same thing - wage bill slashed, dumping all established players and bringing in young farm hands, bringing in a 2nd year coach - with the Red Sox.[/quote']

 

When they started out or recently? I don't follow baseball.

[Pureblood]

I gave the total spend - which is entirely relevant to the level of player we're getting for our money - and I gave net spend. That's not an unbalanced point of view. If anything, I should have gone even further and mentioned the losses year-on-year, the pay-offs of managers, the releases for new managers, and signing fees and bonuses.

 

What I don't appreciate is you having a little pop at me rather than actually discussing the subject. I'm making a concerted effort to engage with people over the subject and not dish out too much personal abuse (other than to utter mental cases). I gave it a go here.

 

 

 

What do you mean 'fall for it'? I gave a gross and a net for transfer spending. It's not propaganda, it's figures based on what reliable sources say we've paid. I laid it all out for Dennis, all sources with links to the Liverpool Echo. The reason I mention it is because it's what actually happened. I'm not having to ignore things to make my argument.

 

 

 

No it doesn't. I've given the net figure, which is very likely to be much lower than it will be in a few weeks.

 

 

 

You see, you want to have a pop at me but you can't even get the basics right. They've been here three years, and in that time the wage bill has gone from £121m, rose to £135m and then went to £119m (not including big payoffs for all the dross Comolli disposed of), so over there time, using the latest available data, the wage bill has dropped £2m. That £2m needs to accrue. To say it covers the net spend is ridiculous enough, let alone when we're talking about a club which lost £40m last year and they had to lend almost £50m, interest free.

 

We've gone from wages being 65% of turnover, to 73%, down to 70%. United are at just over 50% and they're in the CL. We need to get it down to a sensible level so we actually can accrue some money to spend. Even then, it'll have to happen when we're making a profit and not losing money, otherwise cutting the wage bill provides no funds at all. It certainly hasn't provided any funds to spend yet. That's just how numbers work, it's nothing to do with me painting the owners - who I don't care about, btw - as some sort of charity givers. It's just what has happened, whether your or me or Coro or Dennis like it or not.

 

 

 

Nah, sorry. That's just you adding your own, totally incorrect narrative. I've never made out that they're here as some fluffy, benevolent benefactor. Actually, I've recently said the exact opposite. What I'm not going to do is wilfully ignore how much has been spend just so I can paint them in a certain light. I don't care about them at all, I care about getting an accurate view of what's going on.

 

You only seem interested in presenting their side of the story and accept these figures in the Echo without question. I have not forensically examined what has happened but I have seen the squad trimmed before my eyes and there have been some, how to put it, creative dealings with players going out on loan such as Reina.

 

Net spend has been done to death but it seems to me it will take more than 30m per year to get us up there. Is that really enough to give the manager a chance of gatecrashing the top 4? The real contenders spend that on one player without having to sell their equivalent of Fernando Torres. As for your prediction that the net figure is a lot lower than it will be in a few weeks, we will see about that. From where I'm sitting it looks like Suarez is going. Another barren day today in the transfer window...

[TheHowieLama]

When they started out or recently? I don't follow baseball.

 

Over the last 18 months - complete turnover.

[Barrington Womble]

 

Over the last 18 months - complete turnover.

 

Same time frame as us then really? Have they also been slashing the wage bill?

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

The echo is complete nonsense.

 

Yes, so you keep on saying. Of course, it's baseless conjecture backed up by, quite literally, nothing other than your mumblings on a football forum on the internet. You've not offered anything to prove what you've said or even support it. You've offered not one shred of counter evidence. I'll happily accept it if it's offered. I've no bias towards or against the Echo. As it stands, though, you're no different to any other frothy-mouthed screamer on here. Not unless you actually offer something to show they were wrong about something, a fee, or anything I've offered.

 

I've linked the Echo for fees because they've been the most reliable and they're generally accepted as the closest paper to the club. Now, I'm happy to take Barrett at the Times (China lists wages, perhaps?) or Bascombe at the Telegraph. They're all saying 35m for Carroll, they're all saying £20m for Downing. Maybe that's wrong, but until you stop calling it nonsense an offer something else more credible than the only information available, there's very little else I can do.

 

When I mentioned how we'd cut the wage bill a week or so ago and you said you didn't believe the £25m saving that has been rumoured - well that tumour was started by the times and tony barratt who have far more credibility than the echo.

 

So says you. Maybe you're right. I've not read what Tony Barrett said (and I certainly won't take your word for it). I said I doubt we've trimmed £25m off the wage bill (all released figures show £2m was trimmed from the annual wage bill from the point they arrived until 2011/12). You're right, I absolutely question this '£25m' thing, which was actually 30m when I said I doubted it, because I believe it only counts those going out. Where the wage bill is concerned, it's an 'overall' thing. Yeah, we sold Torres. That's 120k per week saved. Let's not mention Andy Carroll and Suarez who came in, they're playing for free. Let's certainly not mention Gerrard's contract extensions, signing fees, let's just say we've got £100k off the wage bill from Aquilani and pretend we didn't have to pay him off. Any real accounting is having an agenda. FSG OUT! That's the impartial, balanced approach.

 

Yet you dismissed it because that suited your agenda and you're treating a shit sheet like the echo as some type of bible, it's just really funny.

 

I'm glad I amuse you. Again I ask, do you actually have anything to offer? Do you have anything to say that's worth debating, or is it just silly sniggering?

 

I can point to last summer, that's all the evidence anybody needed

 

I'm going to have to stop here. This is the agendaless approach, is it? Pointing to not buying Dempsey, but totally ignoring signing players for massive fees? If that's what you're about, it's no wonder what I'm saying's funny to you.

 

You only seem interested in presenting their side of the story and accept these figures in the Echo without question.

 

What fees are you questioning? Any? I'm not accepting anything, I'm saying the Echo have historically been the most reliable when it comes to transfer fees. If you or wom or anybody has an issue with it, you tell me what you will accept and I'll take it from there. If you're not willing to take the Echo's listed prices, what will you accept?

 

The reality is, there absolute are agendas here. I'm on no side other that LFC. I don't care about the ownership, I've never met them, I'm not employed by them, I don't care about their personal wealth, I've nothing at stake at all. I'm saying what I feel is most accurate. If you've got an issue with the accuracy, I'm more than happy to put it right if you've got any more accurate or reliable information available. Do you?

 

It's all very well posters like Barry and Dennis posting comments like 'hahah' or 'I find you funny', but when it's backed up with nothing it's no more interesting or credible than if Timmy Mallet ran through the room doing a wacawave. If I'm that 'foolish' and that ridiculously comical, surely there's something credible to indicate why? Other than, ya know, 'because I said so on a forum'. If there is, I'll change my position right now. This instance.

[Megadrive Man]

I gave the total spend - which is entirely relevant to the level of player we're getting for our money - and I gave net spend. That's not an unbalanced point of view. If anything, I should have gone even further and mentioned the losses year-on-year, the pay-offs of managers, the releases for new managers, and signing fees and bonuses.

 

Most of our recent financial fuck ups are purely down to FSG's complete lack of football knowledge and indecisiveness in the first place!

 

When they realised Woy had to go, they hired the biggest legend in the clubs history, despite the fact they wanted a younger up and coming manager.

 

They then appointed Comolli and oversaw arguably the two most ridiculous transfers of all time in Carroll and Downing.

 

To then sack Dalglish and Comolli in such a short space of time, shows that in their opinion they got it totally wrong.

 

So after this huge fuckup they reverted back to the original plan of bringing in a younger manager, alongside a Director of football.

 

Yet again though they changed their mind when they realised that working alongside a Director of football didn't particularly appeal to a lot of managers, especially when the man they wanted was Louis van gaal.

 

So they appoint an inexperienced manager and don't help him one bit by leaving him short of strikers due to yet another fuck up before the transfer deadline.

 

Because of this we have to wait half a season before we can strengthen the squad, by which point we have very little to play for.

 

So far this summer we haven't really strengthened the first team at all, putting our hopes in freebies and relatively unproven players.

 

FSG have to shoulder a huge portion of the blame for our recent failings in the league and transfer market. To enter a sport/business with so little knowledge is extremely naive and they only have themselves to blame!

 

They have made some positive moves in terms of growing revenues and increasing sponsorship deals, but overall they have been far from great.

[Barrington Womble]

 

Yes' date=' so you keep on saying. Of course, it's baseless conjecture backed up by, quite literally, nothing other than your mumblings on a football forum on the internet. You've not offered anything to prove what you've said or even support it. You've offered not one shred of counter evidence. I'll happily accept it if it's offered. I've no bias towards or against the Echo. As it stands, though, you're no different to any other frothy-mouthed screamer on here. Not unless you actually offer something to show they were wrong about something, a fee, or anything I've offered.

 

I've linked the Echo for fees because they've been the most reliable and they're generally accepted as the closest paper to the club. Now, I'm happy to take Barrett at the Times (China lists wages, perhaps?) or Bascombe at the Telegraph. They're all saying 35m for Carroll, they're all saying £20m for Downing. Maybe that's wrong, but until you stop calling it nonsense an offer something else more credible than the only information available, there's very little else I can do.

 

So says you. Maybe you're right. I've not read what Tony Barrett said (and I certainly won't take your word for it). I said I doubt we've trimmed £25m off the wage bill (all released figures show £2m was trimmed from the annual wage bill from the point they arrived until 2011/12). You're right, I absolutely question this '£25m' thing, which was actually 30m when I said I doubted it, because I believe it only counts those going out. Where the wage bill is concerned, it's an 'overall' thing. Yeah, we sold Torres. That's 120k per week saved. Let's not mention Andy Carroll and Suarez who came in, they're playing for free. Let's certainly not mention Gerrard's contract extensions, signing fees, let's just say we've got £100k off the wage bill from Aquilani and pretend we didn't have to pay him off. Any real accounting is having an agenda. FSG OUT! That's the impartial, balanced approach.

 

I'm glad I amuse you. Again I ask, do you actually have anything to offer? Do you have anything to say that's worth debating, or is it just silly sniggering?

 

I'm going to have to stop here. This is the agendaless approach, is it? Pointing to not buying Dempsey, but totally ignoring signing players for massive fees? If that's what you're about, it's no wonder what I'm saying's funny to you.

 

What fees are you questioning? Any? I'm not accepting anything, I'm saying the Echo have historically been the most reliable when it comes to transfer fees. If you or wom or anybody has an issue with it, you tell me what you will accept and I'll take it from there. If you're not willing to take the Echo's listed prices, what will you accept?[/quote']

 

You see you're putting words in my mouth now. I'm not arsed we didn't buy Dempsey (in fact he was always the owners signing as they tapped him up way before Kenny was sacked and I think he was a poor mans kuyt), but I thought the manager needed more support, both on and off the pitch than he got, money needed to be spent on hiring a top class CEO every bit as much as replacing the players who were sold from under him or before he joined. But hey, you get on with it being rosy in the garden and our owners are here to win and not just make money.

 

It's becoming a tired story, your comic timing is even losing its appeal. You were doing cartwheels last week convinced we'd signed this costa kid. We haven't even bid, but the gospel according to Saint James of Echo had proclaimed the truth and all none believers should be burnt in hell etc.

 

I've said a few times to you now, lets take a look on September the whatever it is when the window closes. I know you'll find ways to backtrack etc, value in the market, no euro football challenged us and all that jazz, but lets wait till then. You have blind faith in FSG and the echo. I think newspapers and fund owners are generally lying deceitful cunts and nothing I have ever seen has allowed me to assume I should trust either. Neither of us will change a view on that, so lets stop boring the crap out of the rest of the forum and stop having the same argument over again or at least give it a rest for a few weeks.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

You were doing cartwheels last week convinced we'd signed this costa kid.

 

No, I wasn't. I said it's unlikely we haven't bid.

 

We haven't even bid

 

Prove it. Only kidding, your word is truth.

 

I've said a few times to you now, lets take a look on September the whatever it is when the window closes. I know you'll find ways to backtrack etc, value in the market, no euro football challenged us and all that jazz, but lets wait till then. You have blind faith in FSG and the echo. I think newspapers and fund owners are generally lying deceitful cunts and nothing I have ever seen has allowed me to assume I should trust either. Neither of us will change a view on that, so lets stop boring the crap out of the rest of the forum and stop having the same argument over again or at least give it a rest for a few weeks.

 

I think you're being a bit of a dickhead. Just so you know.

[Barrington Womble]

 

No' date=' I wasn't. I said it's unlikely we haven't bid.

 

Prove it. Only kidding, your word is truth.

 

I think you're being a bit of a dickhead. Just so you know.[/quote']

 

Hahahaha, now there's your humour back you fucking giant whopper.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

Empty vessel in making loud noises shocker. Echo exclusive.

[TheHowieLama]

Same time frame as us then really? Have they also been slashing the wage bill?

 

Yes.

[Arl arse]

You boring fuckers.

[MLB]

It seems like Barry Wom desperately wants us not to sign anyone just so he can have a pop at the owners.

[Cardie]

 

Over the last 18 months - complete turnover.

 

And, for a bit of context, have they improved as a team or got worse?

 

Because theirs a difference between just cutting costs and making sound sporting decisions that help the team gping forward.

[James Dean]

It's tiresome.

[Cardie]

It seems like Barry Wom desperately wants us not to sign anyone just so he can have a pop at the owners.

 

He'll have a go at them if we do so it's win win.

[Barrington Womble]

It seems like Barry Wom desperately wants us not to sign anyone just so he can have a pop at the owners.

 

I love nothing better for us to sign some decent players, but it doesn't make me blind to what's happening.

[TheHowieLama]

And, for a bit of context, have they improved as a team or got worse?

 

.

 

Pal - it is a trap. Don't say anything.

[ngogswilly]

It'll be interesting to see if Suarez goes what may happen.

 

Will all his fee be reinvested? Will the fee we get plus whatever money we should have right now also be spent?

Will we have time to strengthen?

 

I have a feeling it's all going to happen late and absolutely fuck us in the ass as far as the season ahead goes. But in saying that we really are the master of our own destiny on it. If it all happens late and we end up severely weakened for the season ahead its going to be very fucking frustrating.

[Mustangt125]

The Red Sox have been really good this year.

 

Essentially the Sox did over the last 18 months what we did 2 years ago. They overpaid for all the wrong players who came on huge contracts. They got rid at the first chance they could and sent them all to the LA Dodgers.

 

Since then they are good again, but they haven't spent huge. They're 20 games over .500 and they lead their division.